Tom Tobin wrote:
> I hate to say this, but it looks like you're violating the GPL by not
> releasing Hakyll under the GPL, since Pandoc is GPL'd.
Not necessarily.
The 3 clause BSD license is officially a GPL compatible license. See:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses
It is within the terms of the GPL to link GPL code to a bunch of BSD3 code
as long as you abide by both the GPL and the BSD3 license.
Hakyll would only run into trouble if it was used as a library that linked
to code which was not under a GPL compatible license.
> I *really* wish Pandoc would switch to a non-copyleft license.
The LGPL is still a copyleft license. Do you still have a problem
with that?
> (Pretty please, with sugar and cherries on top?)
Most chunks of code can't switch license because they have dozens of
contributions from dozens of people many of whom they no longer have
contact with.
Erik
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/